An evaluation of programs to support new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Striking a balance with funding for established investigators

As the largest funder of basic biomedical research in the US, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has an interest in maintaining a sustainable, productive workforce of investigators. Over the years, NIH has implemented several programs to attract early-stage investigators and other applicants without prior NIH support. The latest of these is the Next Generation Researchers Initiative. These programs have been shown to be successful in meeting NIH-wide goals but their success for any particular NIH institute or center (IC), and in any particular year, is determined by a variety of factors, some extrinsic to an IC's funding decision process. Each IC must balance support for new investigators with funding for productive ongoing programs of research. We examine historical trends in support of new investigators at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) over a 22-year period, as well as trends in some major extrinsic influences on that support. The results indicate that NIH's new investigator programs have succeeded in maintaining a balance between the support for new NIAID investigators while also continuing to support an expanded pool of established investigators. The programs have been particularly effective in providing support to early-stage investigators.

Influenza response planning for the centers of excellence for influenza research and surveillance: Science preparedness for enhancing global health security

BACKGROUND

The Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS) network, funded by the US National Institutes of Health, has been operational since 2007 and is tasked with conducting research to improve understanding of influenza viruses. Recently, CEIRS developed an Influenza Response Plan (IRP) to improve science preparedness for the network.

METHODS

Development of the IRP involved a collaborative process between project staff, CEIRS center directors or their designees, and NIAID CEIRS leadership (referred to as the Pandemic Planning Advisory Committee [PPAC]). Project staff identified and summarized the response capabilities of each center and then worked with the PPAC to identify and rank research priorities for an emergency response using a modified Delphi method.

RESULTS

Key elements of the response plan include tables of response capabilities for each CEIRS center, a framework that outlines and ranks research priorities for CEIRS during an emergency situation, and an operational strategy for executing the research priorities.

CONCLUSIONS

The CEIRS IRP highlights the importance of enhancing science preparedness in advance of an influenza pandemic or other influenza-related zoonotic incident to ensure that research can be carried out expeditiously and effectively in emergency situations and to improve global health security.

Primary Immune Deficiency Treatment Consortium (PIDTC) report

The Primary Immune Deficiency Treatment Consortium (PIDTC) is a network of 33 centers in North America that study the treatment of rare and severe primary immunodeficiency diseases. Current protocols address the natural history of patients treated for severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome, and chronic granulomatous disease through retrospective, prospective, and cross-sectional studies. The PIDTC additionally seeks to encourage training of junior investigators, establish partnerships with European and other International colleagues, work with patient advocacy groups to promote community awareness, and conduct pilot demonstration projects. Future goals include the conduct of prospective treatment studies to determine optimal therapies for primary immunodeficiency diseases. To date, the PIDTC has funded 2 pilot projects: newborn screening for SCID in Navajo Native Americans and B-cell reconstitution in patients with SCID after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Ten junior investigators have received grant awards. The PIDTC Annual Scientific Workshop has brought together consortium members, outside speakers, patient advocacy groups, and young investigators and trainees to report progress of the protocols and discuss common interests and goals, including new scientific developments and future directions of clinical research. Here we report the progress of the PIDTC to date, highlights of the first 2 PIDTC workshops, and consideration of future consortium objectives.

The data and safety monitoring board and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) clinical trials

The urgency of the Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) epidemic has mandated that multiple therapeutic approaches be developed and that these approaches be evaluated through clinical trials. To oversee these trials, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) has created three large clinical trial programs monitored by a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). For each clinical trial, this Board uses a standardized approach employing contemporary biostatistical, medical, and ethical principles. The DSMB is responsible for reviewing interim data on clinical trial performance, treatment safety and efficacy, and overall study progress. If interim results provide convincing evidence of either excessive adverse effects or significant treatment benefit, the DSMB may recommend early termination of the trial to the NIAID and the study investigators. The responsibility, organization, and operating procedures of this DSMB are presented and illustrated through three clinical trials sponsored by NIAID and monitored by the Board. The rationale and operational model for the DSMB may be a useful example for the development of similar review processes in other HIV clinical trial settings.